BALKAR SINGH @ PHALKI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER , Balkar Singh, seeks anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No. 474 dated 23.8.2001 registered under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in shoirt the Act) with Police Station Sadar, Fatehabad.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution allegations, on 23.8.2001, ASI Charan Singh along with other police officials was present at T-point in the area of village Ayalki in connection with Nakabandi. A Canter bearing registration No. HR-39/4698 came towards Fatehabad side which was signalled to stop by ASI Charan Singh upon which driver of the Canter stopped the canter at some distance. Malkiat Singh was found driving the canter. One person who was sitting behind the canter was successful in making good his escape. In the meanwhile, Dyal Chand also came from the side of Fatehabad on a scooter. He was associated by the police in the investigation. Malkiat Singh disclosed the name of his companion who had escaped from the spot as Balkar Singh. Dyal Chand also disclosed the name and identity of Balkar Singh. The presence of Jiwan Singh Naib Tehsildar, Fatehabad, was secured and thereafter, seizure proceedings were conducted. On checking the Canter, seven jute bags containing poppy-husk were found lying therein and each bag was found to contain 40 Kg. of poppy-husk. After completion of the proceedings, the present case was registered.

(3.) OPPOSING the submissions made, it has been vehemently argued that the identity of the petitioner-accused was disclosed not only by Malkiat Singh but also by Dyal Chand who is an independent witness and his name has been specifically mentioned in the report lodged with the police and thus, it cannot be said that the name of he petitioner has been subsequently introduced during the investigation of the case. It was also pointed out by him that the very fact that the petitioner-accused managed to escape soon after the canter was intercepted by the police clearly shows that he had no explanation with regard to his being with his co-accused in the Canter and that the recovery of 240 Kgs. of poppy-husk from the Canter in which the petitioner-accused and his co-accused were travelling being a commercial quantity, the concession of bail should not be extended to him. It was also submitted by the State counsel that as many as 12 cases were already registered against the petitioner-accused before the registration of the present case against him.